Aditya Verma, secretary of the 'unclaimed' Bihar Cricket Association (BCA) and the original petitioner in the Board of Cricket Control India (BCCI) case, on Monday said the Supreme Court reserving it does not mean that the Indian cricket board can escape itself from implementing the recommendations of Justice R.M. Lodha-led panel.

Verma also criticised the Indian cricket board for showing biasness against the Bihar cricket board.

"BCCI, the abuser of fundamental right, contended that if they give 'one state one board' to Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal then it would be difficult for Bombay cricket to survive. But they have completely neglected the Bihar cricket board, which was founded in the 1930s," Verma said.

"The BCCI might think that they have escaped from implementing the recommendations but they are completely wrong," he added.

Earlier today, the apex court reserved its order after the BCCI sought more time to implement the reforms by Justice Lodha committee.

However, Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramaniam asked the apex court to appoint an administrator or ask the Lodha Committee to do so.

"It appears that at every stage there was defiance and obstructions," the apex court said after going through the records of the BCCI meeting.

BCCI counsel Kapil Sibal said the board has implemented several recommendations, adding they will if given time try to convince the State Cricket Associations to accept the recommendation.

Sibal further said that they do need approval from three-fourth members. The BCCI said it is against the 'one state one vote' recommendation.

Earlier in the day, BCCI president Anurag Thakur denied the allegations of scuttling implementation of recommendations of Lodha panel.

In his affidavit, Thakur clarified that he had not asked ICC CEO Shashank Manohar to say that he did not seek a letter from the International Cricket Council (ICC), but added that he sought a clarification from him on whether Justice Lodha Committee's reforms amounted to interfering with the running of the BCCI.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Aditya Verma, secretary of the 'unclaimed' Bihar Cricket Association (BCA) and the original petitioner in the Board of Cricket Control India (BCCI) case, on Monday said the Supreme Court reserving it does not mean that the Indian cricket board can escape itself from implementing the recommendations of Justice R.M. Lodha-led panel.Verma also criticised the Indian cricket board for showing biasness against the Bihar cricket board."BCCI, the abuser of fundamental right, contended that if they give 'one state one board' to Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal then it would be difficult for Bombay cricket to survive. But they have completely neglected the Bihar cricket board, which was founded in the 1930s," Verma said."The BCCI might think that they have escaped from implementing the recommendations but they are completely wrong," he added.Earlier today, the apex court reserved its order after the BCCI sought more time to implement the reforms by Justice Lodha committee.However, Amicus ...

Aditya Verma, secretary of the 'unclaimed' Bihar Cricket Association (BCA) and the original petitioner in the Board of Cricket Control India (BCCI) case, on Monday said the Supreme Court reserving it does not mean that the Indian cricket board can escape itself from implementing the recommendations of Justice R.M. Lodha-led panel.

Verma also criticised the Indian cricket board for showing biasness against the Bihar cricket board.

"BCCI, the abuser of fundamental right, contended that if they give 'one state one board' to Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal then it would be difficult for Bombay cricket to survive. But they have completely neglected the Bihar cricket board, which was founded in the 1930s," Verma said.

"The BCCI might think that they have escaped from implementing the recommendations but they are completely wrong," he added.

Earlier today, the apex court reserved its order after the BCCI sought more time to implement the reforms by Justice Lodha committee.

However, Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramaniam asked the apex court to appoint an administrator or ask the Lodha Committee to do so.

"It appears that at every stage there was defiance and obstructions," the apex court said after going through the records of the BCCI meeting.

BCCI counsel Kapil Sibal said the board has implemented several recommendations, adding they will if given time try to convince the State Cricket Associations to accept the recommendation.

Sibal further said that they do need approval from three-fourth members. The BCCI said it is against the 'one state one vote' recommendation.

Earlier in the day, BCCI president Anurag Thakur denied the allegations of scuttling implementation of recommendations of Lodha panel.

In his affidavit, Thakur clarified that he had not asked ICC CEO Shashank Manohar to say that he did not seek a letter from the International Cricket Council (ICC), but added that he sought a clarification from him on whether Justice Lodha Committee's reforms amounted to interfering with the running of the BCCI.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Aditya Verma, secretary of the 'unclaimed' Bihar Cricket Association (BCA) and the original petitioner in the Board of Cricket Control India (BCCI) case, on Monday said the Supreme Court reserving it does not mean that the Indian cricket board can escape itself from implementing the recommendations of Justice R.M. Lodha-led panel.

Verma also criticised the Indian cricket board for showing biasness against the Bihar cricket board.

"BCCI, the abuser of fundamental right, contended that if they give 'one state one board' to Manipur, Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal then it would be difficult for Bombay cricket to survive. But they have completely neglected the Bihar cricket board, which was founded in the 1930s," Verma said.

"The BCCI might think that they have escaped from implementing the recommendations but they are completely wrong," he added.

Earlier today, the apex court reserved its order after the BCCI sought more time to implement the reforms by Justice Lodha committee.

However, Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramaniam asked the apex court to appoint an administrator or ask the Lodha Committee to do so.

"It appears that at every stage there was defiance and obstructions," the apex court said after going through the records of the BCCI meeting.

BCCI counsel Kapil Sibal said the board has implemented several recommendations, adding they will if given time try to convince the State Cricket Associations to accept the recommendation.

Sibal further said that they do need approval from three-fourth members. The BCCI said it is against the 'one state one vote' recommendation.

Earlier in the day, BCCI president Anurag Thakur denied the allegations of scuttling implementation of recommendations of Lodha panel.

In his affidavit, Thakur clarified that he had not asked ICC CEO Shashank Manohar to say that he did not seek a letter from the International Cricket Council (ICC), but added that he sought a clarification from him on whether Justice Lodha Committee's reforms amounted to interfering with the running of the BCCI.

(This story has not been edited by Business Standard staff and is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)